Studies Show That we Retain More information From Pieces That Don't Contain Hyperlinks

Uproxx- When you read a book, you comprehend more. According to a study in the Journal of Digital Information, those who read documents with hypertext didn’t retain as much information as those who read text without links. Indeed, book reading is under stimulating. That is a good thing because your brain can transfer this information from your “working memory” to “long-term memory.” Neuroscientists have discovered that long-term memory isn’t just where you store random facts, but “schemas” that help you organize thoughts and concepts. But there is only so much you can transfer into your long-term memory at once, what scientists call the “cognitive load.”



Slow clap for the Journal of Digital Information! This is some really groundbreaking shit they just delved into. You mean to tell me that blogs aren't sources of knowledge that can increase a person's "cognitive load"? Someone must have fed me a cognitive load of shit to get me to start up this site. I thought I was over here inputting information into my readership's long term memory, and it turns out   my random, incoherent opinions aren't even helping them to organize their own thoughts and concepts. Better close this tab if you plan on comprehending what you are currently reading for longer than the amount of time you are reading it. This is honestly stunning to me. Who would have thought that the YouTube generation can't recollect every video they've watch while inevitably falling down the rabbit hole? Who would thought that the Twitter generation wasn't committing every 140 character blurb into their life long mental retention center. I almost feel like everything I have ever written is a waste now that I know that not everyone that consumes it can recite it verbatim days, weeks, months, or even years later.

​Hey, little heads up to this research group. The reason you hear about ADHD less and less everyday is because it's not a disease. Well, it might be a disease, but if it is then it's contagious and the whole fucking world has it. I don't think you can call something a disorder when a vast majority of the public is infected by it. Of course we don't retain information when there are hyperlinks. The unknown is enticing. Who knows? It might even be better than what we are currently reading. What are we supposed to ignore that curiosity? Why pick between doors one and two, when I have the ability to peek behind every single metaphorical door on the entire internet. Give me temporary satisfaction over long term fulfillment very single time. Society is becoming more and more perverted by the day. We are all just trying to get our physical and mental rocks off at a moment's notice. Did these people actually publish "WHEN you read a book" like that's actually a thing that people still do? HA! Hyperlinks or GTFO. Whatever I am reading at any given moment is never good enough, and I refuse to continue reading it unless there is a possibility of a quick and easy channel to read something that potentially better. Don't look at me like I am the problem 'Journal of Digital Information'. It's not my fault I choose to live in the now. Why don't you try being stimulated for once in your life ya prudes? Try getting your head out of that antiquated form of literature and embrace all the immediate amusement that new age media has to offer.